similar to: [LLVMdev] Min and max

Dear all, I have a function MYFUN which depends on 3 positive parameters TETA[1], TETA[2], and TETA[3]; x belongs to [0,1]. I integrate the function over [0,0.1], [0.1,0.2] and [0.2,0.3] and want to choose the three parameters so that these three integrals are as close to, resp., 2300, 4600 and 5800 as possible. As I have three equations with three unknowns, I expect the exact fit, i.e., the SS

Hi, I have been trying to move some instructions between basic blocks , After looking at the API , I found llvm::Instruction::clone() but there is no result value for this. For example- source Basic block : continuation: ; preds = %else, %then %iftmp = phi i32 [ 5, %then ], [ 9, %else ] store i32 %iftmp, i32* %datasize ; 3 instructions below

I was trying to run the simplify CFG Pass in LLVM , and delete an unreachable basic block ("continuation" below ) after running one of my own IR transforms , but I keep getting the error - While deleting: i8* %g Use still stuck around after Def is destroyed: store i8 0, i8* %g I am well aware of what that means, but isn't the whole purpose of the "simplifyCFGPass" to

instcombine can handle certain orders of "icmp"s that are "or"ed together: x != 5 OR x > 10 OR x == 8 becomes.. x != 5 OR x == 8 becomes.. x != 5 However, a different ordering prevents the simplification: x == 8 OR x > 10 OR x != 5 becomes.. %or.eq8.gt10 OR x != 5 and that can't be simplified because we now have an "or" OR "icmp". What would I

Hi All, I was wondering if there is an optimisation pass that moves a stack allocated array, initialised with constant values, to a global constant array. And if there is such a pass, what requirements are there for it to operate? My optimised IR is below. As you can see an array of 5 integers is created with alloca, then each element is stored to in turn. It would be nice if this array was

Here's an initial stab, but I'm not too happy about the temporarily adding new instructions then removing it because returning it will have it added back in to replace other uses. I also added a couple test cases pass with the new InstructionCombining changes (the old code only passes one of the added tests). Also, this change exposes some simplification for

Hi, all I'd like to write a code that can build different codes based on LLVM version. Like code snippets in the below. #ifdef __LLVM_29__ PHINode *PN = Builder.CreatePHI (Type::getDoubleTy(getGlobalContext()), 2, "iftmp"); #elif __LLVM_28__ PHINode *PN = Builder.CreatePHI (Type::getDoubleTy(getGlobalContext()), "iftmp"); #else assert ("wrong

Hello, I'm doing some Def/Use analysis, and I'm hung up on one tricky spot. The BB in question is attached. Ignore the red. The issue is that '%13 = load...' instruction does not show up as a Use for the '%scevgep25' definition, and I feel like it should. Instead, it shows up as a Use for '%iftmp.55.0 = select...', though Operand(0) for this '%13 =

Dear All, I have, in an LLVM bitcode program, the following phi node: %iftmp.225.0 = phi i8* [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str12597431, i32 0, i32 0), %bb114 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 0), %bb111 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 0), %bb111 ] This phi instruction has two arguments for the same incoming basic block. The only reason why it passes

On Mar 17, 2009, at 11:37 AMPDT, John Criswell wrote: > Dear All, > > I have, in an LLVM bitcode program, the following phi node: > > %iftmp.225.0 = phi i8* [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str12597431, > i32 0, > i32 0), %bb114 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 > 0), > %bb111 ], [ getelementptr ([10 x i8]* @.str1258, i32 0, i32 0), > %bb111 ]

Hi, I have this piece of code: tm = local ? localtime(&curr) : gmtime(&curr); if (!tm) return NULL; which translates into something like: ---------------------------------------------- entry: %iftmp.0 = alloca %struct.tm*, align 8 %tm = alloca %struct.tm*, align 8 ... // Declares iftmp.0 as iftmp.0 call void @llvm.dbg.declare( { }* %iftmp.0, { }* bitcast

hello, I have a graph and i use qgraph package to calculate centrality parameters. Now I want to know the maximum value of shortest path for each vertex with discarding the Inf value in short pathes. For this I use the ShortestPathLengths of centrality function in qgraph. but when I want to get the maximum the result is wrong. here is my code: cen<-centrality(Q)

Hard to follow data analysis without data. Try making your example reproducible [1][2][3] and post in plain text (a setting in your emailer). Read the Posting Guide mentioned in the footer to avoid other posting pitfalls. [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5963269/how-to-make-a-great-r-reproducible-example [2] http://adv-r.had.co.nz/Reproducibility.html [3]

On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:51 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > > # ignore assumed dependences. > for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) { > tmp1 = A[3i+1]; > tmp2 = A[3i+2]; > tmp3 = tmp1 + tmp2; > A[3i] = tmp3; > } > > Now I apply for whatever reason a partial reg2mem transformation. > > float tmp3[1]; > > # ignore assumed

When I was trying to run mutiple E1s over TDMoE, the zaptel would drivers complain about too little memory, whenever I added more than 31 channels. Requesting 62 channels in a dynamic span gave me ... span creation failed: Cannot allocate memory upon loading the zaptel drivers. How would you go about running, 8 or 16 say, E1s over TDMoE? Would you create multiple dynamic spans or just one large

Kangkook Jee <aixer77 at gmail.com> writes: > Hi, all > > I'd like to write a code that can build different codes based on LLVM version. > Like code snippets in the below. > > #ifdef __LLVM_29__ > PHINode *PN = Builder.CreatePHI (Type::getDoubleTy(getGlobalContext()), 2, "iftmp"); > #elif __LLVM_28__ > PHINode *PN = Builder.CreatePHI

Hi R-users, I'm quite new to R and trying to learn the basics. I have a following problem concerning the convertion of array object into data frame. I have made following data sets tmp1 <- rnorm(100) tmp2 <- gl(10,2,length=100) tmp3 <- as.data.frame(cbind(tmp1,tmp2)) tmp3.sum <- tapply(tmp3$tmp1,tmp3$tmp2,sum) tmp3.sum <- as.data.frame(tapply(tmp1,tmp2,sum)) and I want the

How come the k is 3 in all of this output? I expected it to be equal to r. > tmp3 <- lapply(1:3, function(k) function(r) print(paste(r, "<- r | k ->", k))) > for (i in 1:3) { tmp3[[i]](i) } [1] "1 <- r | k -> 3" [1] "2 <- r | k -> 3" [1] "3 <- r | k -> 3" -- Med venlig hilsen Rune Schjellerup Philosof Ph.d-stipendiat,

On 01/29/2013 07:58 PM, Nadav Rotem wrote: > > On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:51 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es > <mailto:tobias at grosser.es>> wrote: > >> >> # ignore assumed dependences. >> for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) { >> tmp1 = A[3i+1]; >> tmp2 = A[3i+2]; >> tmp3 = tmp1 + tmp2; >> A[3i] = tmp3; >> } >>

Consider the following C code: typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) __attribute__(( aligned(4) )) float float2_align2; void foo(void) { const float * p; size_t offset; float2 tmp = *((float2_align2 *)(p+offset)); } When compiled with clang ‹emit-llvm I get: define void @foo() { entry: %p = alloca float*, align 4